Originally Posted by
blitzen
Due to fire codes, or min square meter per occupant or ..... rules that change by country/ city that would have been very hard. Especially given that in Europe the building are not newly build on a wide open lot but years old (sometimes 100+ years) when rooms were smaller. And I don't think any hotel would combine 2 rooms just to have the ability to accomodate 4 (that is what connecting rooms are for). If Hyatt would have insisted the hotel owner would be with Hilton, Marriott, .....
The fire codes as an explanation for the occupancy standards being so low in Europe and for hotel enforcement of max occupancy as set by the hotels is mostly just an excuse not rooted in how regulations work here and fire code is mainly not the reason things are as they are here with occupancy limits. Things are like this here in Europe and various other parts of the world as part of hotel owners’ revenue maximization schemes. And Hyatt indeed is first and foremost in the market of attracting and retaining hotel owners.
A couple of DINKs are generally more lucrative customers for higher priced hotels and their desire for ancillary revenue than one with multiple kids eating into a unified family budget spread across two rooms. It’s a factor that hotel developers and owners do consider.